be it Gore, Kerry or even Clinton... My post merely reflects that I don't think it likely that they would be able to carry the day. As bad as things may be by then, I could be wrong--it may be that every person who is
still allowed to vote, regardless of stripe, might vote anti-Republican and we will win in a landslide.
Now then, as to the information you provided. I haven't really heard a great deal about General Clark--despite the fact that I've heard of him often, there's never been much depth (and, I didn't really go looking). So, thanks for the information. I do like what I hear. I would like to hear him have greater success among Democrats, to begin with...
Actually, I'm longing to find a viable Democrat at the earliest possible moment (now, if not yesterday). That would particularly include seeing some evidence that this person is actually providing politically relevant, effective leadership to the party over these years before the 2008 elections. To see someone actually bringing this party together, uniting us and building excitement; contributing to success as early as the 2006 elections and henceforth promoting measures for strategically countering the Republican leadership in relevant and even innovative ways. They should, of course, be well liked by and increasingly popular within the Democratic party, while making news for providing incisive analyses of the current Republican leadership, and commentary about their decisions and policies as well as offering their own clear vision, alternate solutions and new ways of thinking (interesting, memorable, even viral) about Democratic platform positions.
As far as the analysis and commentary, I've recently seen both Kerry and Gore providing leadership of the sort that probably would have given them the kind of numbers that would have been practically immune from the Republican electronic electoral fudge factor; but as I've said, I think it's a bit late for them to be the final selection--and that is just one of the things I would want and expect to see from the right
leader. Perhaps my wish list is a bit unrealistic; the world sees such leaders only a few to several times a century. Even so, the time is right, the cause is right (left actually), and the people are ready--and as yet they are a relatively completely untapped resource. Our next leader needs to find a way to involve every Democrat (and others as well) in what should seem to be a personal way in the very real struggle to save and restore our nation. To return us to the path that provides the reasons behind being proud to be an American.
I would say that I think General Wesley Clark has, seems to have and even ought to have much of what it would take. The intelligence, strength and leadership qualities seem to be there. If he manages to begin playing a higher profile role, is able to communicate who he is, what he believes and a compelling plan, and is able to reach a large enough audience (not having positive media access makes such things particularly difficult; it's no surprise, though, that the media would act in such a way as to help prevent the rise of a real Democratic contender) he might be the right choice. If he could contribute the kind of unifying, motivating, satisfyingly strategic leadership and clear, compelling vision as well; it would seem that none could stop him.
For my part; I hope he is 'the one' and he does break out of the invisible box that seems to be placed over every Democratic leader both by Republicans and, quote, un-quote, "Democrats"--a general reference to centrists, DLC members and all those who claim title to the name Democrat but who don't want a real Democratic Leader rise unless he's a clone of their own personal brand of Democrat. As to that last, we should all be seeking a highly progressive, idealistic and solid Democrat as opposed to one who compromises and shifts their "ideology" towards the center/right as needed. The only caveat would be that we should support any reasonable Democrat (sorry, but that does not include DINOs) if they are both the best choice available and stand a real chance to unify the party and lead to an overall Democratic victory. As I mentioned before, the time is now and the opportunity is ripe--even if the obstacles (lack of media) are at an obstructive level.
We need Democrats to become truly involved and deeply committed (there are many who are, but many more who would
say they are, but aren't nearly committed enough). As it stands, given the obstacles arrayed against us--such as electoral fraud (still functional), corrupt districting and gerrymandering, profoundly biased and dishonest media and lopsided campaign financial contributions (disparate Corporate contributions, illegal/corrupt campaign funding arrangements, etc), we probably will fail to retake Congress despite the damning evidence of Republican malfeasance and incompetence. We simply haven't committed everything to the fight. The reason we haven't is that while most of us intellectually grasp the seriousness of the situation; it just hasn't reached us on an emotional or 'gut level'.
It's still too inconceivable and unbelievable that our very Democracy is in jeapordy; we're still harboring the hope that it really isn't that bad--that things will somehow work out, that sanity will prevail. The actual
Pain hasn't yet come to roost; our economy hasn't tanked, we still have jobs, food and pretty much everything we've come to depend on for comfort/satisfaction in life. Intellectually, most of us know that thus far it's just been luck, a booming real-estate industry, the self-interest of the Chinese and various other elements that could fail at any moment, that's kept us from realizing a massive recession (potentially a depression). Still, it hasn't happened; things are extremely disturbing but not devastating, yet... So, the proposition that we need total committment, such as donating every penny we can spare, actually signing up and spending every available hour working for our local, state and national Democratic party organizations or whatever else we can find to do, just hasn't seemed truly necessary.
Perhaps we're just thinking that if it really does get truly intolerable, we'll be able to organize and contribute then. Certainly the motivation will be approaching what will be needed, but we cannot know what new and oppressive obstacles we'll be facing then. We may no longer have internet access. We may be struggling so desperately, merely for food, water, gasoline and rent/mortgage money to keep our families alive that there may be nothing left to expend on the political front. We may even have lost the freedom to gather in public. One cannot guess what a totalitarian leadership that believes our laws don't apply to them can get away with. It's desperately hard to imagine our government being overthrown or changed beyond recognition, much less the loss of such rights and freedoms... but it has happened elsewhere in the world and repeatedly throughout history.
It's not inconceivable that whole branches of government could disappear overnight (well, over a day, or so--any time when the majority can be found together; just read Tom Clancy's book
Debt of Honor or remember 9/11) due, ostensibly, to some sort of terrible "terrorist" attack (no doubt). Pretty absurd, one hopes. Point being twofold, that first of all we should act now, while we can, regardless of how difficult or hopeful our situation will be, and second, that it's not quite inconceivable for a real change of government (while even if a violent coup occurred, it would seem likely that the states would rebel unless there were some massive threat, such as military control or nuclear attack (in this case, our own nukes used against us; or our bioweapons--it would depend on the ruthlessness of those behind the coup)). Still, why would anyone need to resort to such an approach when one's own political forces can pervert elections in ways that can't be determined.
So, nevertheless, if we want our country back, we very well may have to approach politics with as much single-mindedness and dedication as the Republicans have. Perhaps more if you consider that (a) they generally have alot more money than we do, and (b) they are already installed in the positions of power.
Seems I have gone very wide afield indeed, time to get back to both reality and the subject at hand...
Viable presidential candidates aren't yet obvious except a few to their own groups of supporters. If a given individual has merit, there's time yet for them to make themselves known. General Clark may have what it takes (especially in such times as we might face a direct threat to our government), but he still needs to reach more people with his message; and I wonder what's holding him back since he seems to have a following but isn't being heard. Then again, even the DNC Chairman, Dean, is barely heard from; and even if
he isn't the next contender, given his claimed goals and mandate, if he was able we should indeed be hearing alot from him. It's just not easy, and this isolation ridden environment Democrats find themselves in is sure to be by design. It's far more than just the natural difficulty in uniting such a cosmopolitan collection of subgroups that is the Democratic Party, it's plainly the result of well laid Republican owned media corporations. Of course, if we truly committed, fifty million Democratic voters across this country could, even if with some difficulty, organize and collect such a massive chunk of investment funds--we could build our own XOF Democratic News and Entertainment Network from the ground up. Vast numbers of liberal media people would flock to it and delight in producing content for it. If someone would think big and lead by asking Democrats everywhere to participate in founding such a network through their most generous contributions and investments. Besides, with such a success (such a large audience guaranteed) all but guaranteed, it could help Democrats make some real investment income!
Egad, I've gone off topic again. Time to put down the pen (err... keyboard). Cheerio, and thanks
for providing the "General details" (uh, the General's details; General Wesley Clark's details that is). "General"ly interesting. Egad, now I've gone punny; quick, someone put me out of my misery! Stop me... I seem to be in a state of "General" disarray... nevermind, it's okay, I seem to be fading away on my own...
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
